GOP Predictably Sells Out America

A month ago was a day before the Nov. 4 election. In this space I predicted, “GOP sellout strikes on Wednesday.” It wasn’t hard being Nostradamus. Here’s the latest.

Quoting Mitt Romney, I said the GOP would give President Obama unconstitutional authority to negotiate a new trade deal, with Congress only having an “up or down” response. That would circumvent the clear Constitutional language, “The Congress shall have the Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises….”

Next, I prognosticated, “An immigration amnesty sellout also is inevitable.” Of course, since then we have had Obama’s treasonous amnesty of illegal aliens. USA Today reported yesterday, “WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans acknowledged Tuesday that the party has limited immediate options to curtail President Obama's executive actions on immigration, but they vowed to continue their efforts next year when the GOP will take full control of Congress.”

And your contribution to their re-election campaigns will guarantee action.

Finally, I said Sen. John McCain would be far more powerful than such limited-interventionists as Sen. Rand Paul. On Thanksgiving Day, Wall Street Journal editorialist and ultra-ultra-chickenhawk warmonger Matthew Kaminiski had much to be thankful for:

“The Arizona senator may not have been on the ballot in the midterms, but the Republican sweep was a personal triumph. In the GOP-run Congress, Mr. McCain is poised to realize an ambition to be chairman of the Armed Services Committee. After an early and loud tea-party challenge fizzled, his best friend in the Senate, South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham, kept his seat easily. Mr. McCain is just as excited to claim several new GOP winners—in Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa and North Carolina—as ‘pro-defense internationalists’ in his image.”

Comments

Leave a Comment

*Name

*City:

*Email:

Comment:

Please enter text you see below:

Dan HayesRego Park12/3/2014 09:24 PM

Unfortunately so true, so true.

jack baileylas veags12/3/2014 09:28 PM

"Pro-defense internationalists"?? Whatever he means by that. Had he said "defense nationalists", people might really get the wrong idea. Anyway, I apologize to all my friends for urging them to vote for Dr. Strangelove couple of elections back. He had me completely fooled.

Harry HellerSan Francisco12/4/2014 12:13 PM

My fellow paleocons are often wise, but too seldom politically clever. Weak people, which is what we are (this is not a statement about moral character, only political power), must choose their battles with care. Why do paleos so often think we can "have it all", when we almost never get anything? ///
The most important 'metapolitical' issue of our time is ending the Third World immigration colonization. This was so even before the Obamnesty. How are we to effectuate this? May I respectfully suggest that we need temporarily to jettison every other issue where we diverge from the (despicable) Neocon Ascendancy, and save our ammo for the immigration fight? We must either agree, or at least remain silent, on trade promotion, outsourcing, warmongering, NSA spying, rabid sycophancy towards Israel, and everything else objectionable coming from the faux-cons. I know - tough swallows! But immigration restrictionists (I'm really referring to political figures, not paleo intellectuals) must appear as mainstream as possible, so as to isolate our internal enemies around the immigration issue alone. On that issue, we have the grassroots, and the corporate apologists know it. But the more we deviate from a strict immigration focus the easier it is for us to be painted as 'fringe' - when, to reiterate, opposition to both mass immigration and the Obamnesty heavily favor us.

TJFRFD12/4/2014 05:49 PM

If only Mr. Heller were right! If he were, then his advice would be sound. Alas, the one fight conservatives are least likely to win is over immigration, and playing possum on other issues will only discourage the minority of Americans who are willing to rally around calls for national preservation.

Harry HellerSan Francisco12/5/2014 11:11 AM

Dr. Fleming: Why do you think we are LEAST likely to win on immigration? And if we don't win on immigration, then will we achieve lasting victory on anything else? ///
My point, perhaps inadequately presented, was that, in my experience, which is less than an expert's, but more than a neophyte's, there are plenty within the TRUE conservative grassroots who really do: believe in "free" trade (whether they should is another issue); think any legislated limitations on outsourcing would be "statism" or even socialism; strongly support American "power-projection" overseas; attach veritable theological importance to Israel's security interests (as a Catholic, this surpasseth my understanding, but decades ago I dated a girl from an evangelical family, and was introduced to scads of rabid if vapid Zionists-of-the-American-Right - sorry, sir, but they're out there, like them or not); and hold that NSA activities are a vital part of the also accepted War on Terror. Changing any of these widely-held Republican positions will take a lot of "outreach", to say the least. /// On the other hand, informal canvassing among family and friends has enabled me to locate precisely ONE supporter of the Obamnesty, and this fellow is surely the Son of the Original Limousine Liberal, and in fact, an Obama fundraiser (I keep him as a friend for other than political reasons, including mere long-standing, going back to our childhood). Moreover, if you wish to canvass the vox populi, please peruse the comments (set to "Most Replied") following any immigration related article posted at Yahoo News (unless it came from a known Far Left source, like HuffPost). You might be pleasantly surprised at just how much support the restrictionist side has. /// I sincerely believe that opposition to the Amnesty is that paleocon position currently enjoying the widest popular support. I think we should 'milk' it for all its worth. The Real Right badly needs a victory or two if we are to remain relevant.